9 ms·

Nadella's talking about how the web "grew up" on Windows; it's just rhetoric about how the dominant (client-side) portion of the web was facilitated through Win

by tpush 5y ago

Nadella's talking about how the web "grew up" on Windows; it's just rhetoric about how the dominant (client-side) portion of the web was facilitated through Windows.

goalieca 5y ago
>portion of the web was facilitated through Windows I'm old enough to have lived through ie6. They did everything they could to hold the web back a generation because they saw the future and it was web services and the open web doesn't exclusively run on windows.
- admax88q 5y ago
  They did _almost_ everything in their power. They did not however, prevent you from downloading and installing netscape like Apple is currently doing with iOS. I believe that was Nadella's main point, which I don't disagree with. While they did attempt to embrace, extend, extinguish, the platform was fundamentally not locked down which still allowed the web to take over.
  - jakeva 5y ago
    > prevent you from downloading and installing netscape like Apple is currently doing with iOS. I don't know about netscape, but I currently use a browser other than Safari as my default browser. Unless you mean the underlying framework is WebKit?
    - zargon 5y ago
      A distinction without a difference.
    - 8note 5y ago
      Safari reskinned to look like Firefox is still safari in my opinion. Apple gets complete control over what a webpage can do, and chooses the features it supports to ensure the web cannot compete with the app store
      - vbezhenar 5y ago
        It's not Safari. It's worse than Safari, because it misses some API to match a proper Safari.
  - quanticle 5y ago
    They did not however, prevent you from downloading and installing netscape like Apple is currently doing with iOS. They absolutely tried to, and were only stopped because the Justice Department told them that bundling IE with Windows was an illegal use of monopoly power. It's interesting that Nadella gives Microsoft credit for that and not Attorney General Janet Reno, under whose authority the Justice Department pursued the anti-trust case against Microsoft that led to browser bundling being declared anticompetitive.
    - tootie 5y ago
      Bundling isn't the same thing. They proactively pushed IE on Windows users which was deemed anticompetitive, but they never prevented you from using Netscape or Firefox. And the only reason that decision was made then and is not applicable to iOS now is that Windows overall was so dominant as a desktop OS that it effectively owned the market. Apple can say that users who don't like Safari can just go buy an Android.
    - babypuncher 5y ago
      Your memory might be faulty. They got in trouble for bundling Internet Explorer with Windows, but at no point did they ever make any attempt to make it so you could not install an alternative browser.
  - notriddle 5y ago
    > embrace, extend, extinguish The funny thing about that phrase is that it was invented to describe Active Directory's relationship with LDAP and Kerberos. Active Directory is definitely one of Windows's killer applications, and rather than attempting to kill it, Microsoft instead makes a killing off of it.
- nbevans 5y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajax_(programming) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajax_(programming) "In 1996, the iframe tag was introduced by Internet Explorer; like the object element, it can load or fetch content asynchronously. In 1998, the Microsoft Outlook Web Access team developed the concept behind the XMLHttpRequest scripting object.[4] It appeared as XMLHTTP in the second version of the MSXML library,[4][5] which shipped with Internet Explorer 5.0 in March 1999.[6]" This was Microsoft's single biggest contribution to the early web. Everyone likes to hate on IE but actually it did include a lot of innovation.
- tootie 5y ago
  I remember this time as well and it's not really true. They pushed a lot of proprietary features like ActiveX, but IE overall was far more sophisticated than Netscape. It really pushed DOM (albeit a hacky, proprietary DOM) as a way to dynamically manipulate pages. They also birthed XMLHTTP which was the original format for AJAX. Netscape was pretty Stone Age by comparison.
  - deaddodo 5y ago
    Some new technologies that are now crucial to web standards were developed as a part of IE. But to say Netscape was “Stone Age” in comparison is disingenuous and/or a misremembering of the past. Especially the following 5 years after Netscape died; when the web stagnated on IE6 while Firefox and Safari slowly gained market share. IE had many issues supporting other crucial (and standard) technologies like CSS, images + alpha blending, basic ease of use features (tabs, accessibility, extensions), security (a good chunk of the ciphersuite was missing), etc.
- raydev 5y ago
  It really does not matter what MS tried to do back the, as the average consumer was using Windows to access the internet. Sure, MS was bad. Doesn’t change the fact that most people first experienced the internet through Windows. And it was that audience that brought business and more money.
nix23 5y ago
No they grew up on Netscape flash and java (the sun one)...windows was and is, just a application runtime.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
ComodoHacker 5y ago
I think it's not just rethoric. E-commerce was the thing that brought money to the Web, that let it grow up and grow big. And the vast majority of these transactions were made by people sitting before monitors with a browser on Windows.
- agumonkey 5y ago
  That's a specific side of the web. To many web == linked documents, not business.
  - ComodoHacker 5y ago
    Without that business, there wouldn't be all the awesome tech the Web is now.
    - agumonkey 5y ago
      web is not an awesome tech
bluedino 5y ago
In the "old days", I remember more webmasters using Macs, especially with all the Adobe/Macromedia tools. Even going into "Web 2.0" with Intel Macs.
- deaddodo 5y ago
  I’m sorry, but your memory is either for a very specific community or just naive. Just the sheer number of applications around web development for Windows vs Mac at the time would disprove that belief. For every Cyberduck; you have a WinSCP, FileZilla, CuteFTP, SmartFTP, CoreFTP, CrossFTP, etc. Especially since the Macromedia suite was also available on Windows. Having been in the community pretty deeply in those days, I can assure you that Apple didn’t gain any sizeable market share until Web 2.0. The prototype.js + Rails developers definitely preferred OS X for their tool suite. The growth of backend developers, in general, led to Apple’s growth; via developer’s needing terminal access and easy installation/management of backend tools with ease of use.
  - bluedino 5y ago
    I think I'm going back farther than you think. Webstar, BBEdit, and of course the Macromedia stuff which was in it's infancy. Macs seemed like a bargain compared to say a WebForce Indy
    - deaddodo 5y ago
      I'm talking pre-Macromedia. The mid-90s to mid-00s were ruled by Windows developers on the web, with a slice for Linux and Mac users. Mac didn't become any sort of influence until sometime between 2006 and 2009 and certainly didn't gain its current popularity with web developers until 2012-2013. If you're talking pre-Windows 95, certainly Mac was more popular than after it's release. But the OS also had a much more sizeable marketshare[1] and the inverse was true (Windows was devoid of software and tools). At the same time, however, the web was also much smaller and certainly still in it's nascent infancy. 1 - https://arstechnica.com/features/2005/12/total-share/7/ https://arstechnica.com/features/2005/12/total-share/7/

by tpush 5y ago

Nadella's talking about how the web "grew up" on Windows; it's just rhetoric about how the dominant (client-side) portion of the web was facilitated through Windows.

goalieca 5y ago

>portion of the web was facilitated through Windows I'm old enough to have lived through ie6. They did everything they could to hold the web back a generation because they saw the future and it was web services and the open web doesn't exclusively run on windows.

admax88q 5y ago
They did _almost_ everything in their power. They did not however, prevent you from downloading and installing netscape like Apple is currently doing with iOS. I believe that was Nadella's main point, which I don't disagree with. While they did attempt to embrace, extend, extinguish, the platform was fundamentally not locked down which still allowed the web to take over.
- jakeva 5y ago
  > prevent you from downloading and installing netscape like Apple is currently doing with iOS. I don't know about netscape, but I currently use a browser other than Safari as my default browser. Unless you mean the underlying framework is WebKit?
  - zargon 5y ago
    A distinction without a difference.
  - 8note 5y ago
    Safari reskinned to look like Firefox is still safari in my opinion. Apple gets complete control over what a webpage can do, and chooses the features it supports to ensure the web cannot compete with the app store
    - vbezhenar 5y ago
      It's not Safari. It's worse than Safari, because it misses some API to match a proper Safari.
- quanticle 5y ago
  They did not however, prevent you from downloading and installing netscape like Apple is currently doing with iOS. They absolutely tried to, and were only stopped because the Justice Department told them that bundling IE with Windows was an illegal use of monopoly power. It's interesting that Nadella gives Microsoft credit for that and not Attorney General Janet Reno, under whose authority the Justice Department pursued the anti-trust case against Microsoft that led to browser bundling being declared anticompetitive.
  - tootie 5y ago
    Bundling isn't the same thing. They proactively pushed IE on Windows users which was deemed anticompetitive, but they never prevented you from using Netscape or Firefox. And the only reason that decision was made then and is not applicable to iOS now is that Windows overall was so dominant as a desktop OS that it effectively owned the market. Apple can say that users who don't like Safari can just go buy an Android.
  - babypuncher 5y ago
    Your memory might be faulty. They got in trouble for bundling Internet Explorer with Windows, but at no point did they ever make any attempt to make it so you could not install an alternative browser.
- notriddle 5y ago
  > embrace, extend, extinguish The funny thing about that phrase is that it was invented to describe Active Directory's relationship with LDAP and Kerberos. Active Directory is definitely one of Windows's killer applications, and rather than attempting to kill it, Microsoft instead makes a killing off of it.
nbevans 5y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajax_(programming) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajax_(programming) "In 1996, the iframe tag was introduced by Internet Explorer; like the object element, it can load or fetch content asynchronously. In 1998, the Microsoft Outlook Web Access team developed the concept behind the XMLHttpRequest scripting object.[4] It appeared as XMLHTTP in the second version of the MSXML library,[4][5] which shipped with Internet Explorer 5.0 in March 1999.[6]" This was Microsoft's single biggest contribution to the early web. Everyone likes to hate on IE but actually it did include a lot of innovation.
tootie 5y ago
I remember this time as well and it's not really true. They pushed a lot of proprietary features like ActiveX, but IE overall was far more sophisticated than Netscape. It really pushed DOM (albeit a hacky, proprietary DOM) as a way to dynamically manipulate pages. They also birthed XMLHTTP which was the original format for AJAX. Netscape was pretty Stone Age by comparison.
- deaddodo 5y ago
  Some new technologies that are now crucial to web standards were developed as a part of IE. But to say Netscape was “Stone Age” in comparison is disingenuous and/or a misremembering of the past. Especially the following 5 years after Netscape died; when the web stagnated on IE6 while Firefox and Safari slowly gained market share. IE had many issues supporting other crucial (and standard) technologies like CSS, images + alpha blending, basic ease of use features (tabs, accessibility, extensions), security (a good chunk of the ciphersuite was missing), etc.
raydev 5y ago
It really does not matter what MS tried to do back the, as the average consumer was using Windows to access the internet. Sure, MS was bad. Doesn’t change the fact that most people first experienced the internet through Windows. And it was that audience that brought business and more money.

nix23 5y ago

No they grew up on Netscape flash and java (the sun one)...windows was and is, just a application runtime.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

ComodoHacker 5y ago

I think it's not just rethoric. E-commerce was the thing that brought money to the Web, that let it grow up and grow big. And the vast majority of these transactions were made by people sitting before monitors with a browser on Windows.

agumonkey 5y ago
That's a specific side of the web. To many web == linked documents, not business.
- ComodoHacker 5y ago
  Without that business, there wouldn't be all the awesome tech the Web is now.
  - agumonkey 5y ago
    web is not an awesome tech

bluedino 5y ago

In the "old days", I remember more webmasters using Macs, especially with all the Adobe/Macromedia tools. Even going into "Web 2.0" with Intel Macs.

deaddodo 5y ago
I’m sorry, but your memory is either for a very specific community or just naive. Just the sheer number of applications around web development for Windows vs Mac at the time would disprove that belief. For every Cyberduck; you have a WinSCP, FileZilla, CuteFTP, SmartFTP, CoreFTP, CrossFTP, etc. Especially since the Macromedia suite was also available on Windows. Having been in the community pretty deeply in those days, I can assure you that Apple didn’t gain any sizeable market share until Web 2.0. The prototype.js + Rails developers definitely preferred OS X for their tool suite. The growth of backend developers, in general, led to Apple’s growth; via developer’s needing terminal access and easy installation/management of backend tools with ease of use.
- bluedino 5y ago
  I think I'm going back farther than you think. Webstar, BBEdit, and of course the Macromedia stuff which was in it's infancy. Macs seemed like a bargain compared to say a WebForce Indy
  - deaddodo 5y ago
    I'm talking pre-Macromedia. The mid-90s to mid-00s were ruled by Windows developers on the web, with a slice for Linux and Mac users. Mac didn't become any sort of influence until sometime between 2006 and 2009 and certainly didn't gain its current popularity with web developers until 2012-2013. If you're talking pre-Windows 95, certainly Mac was more popular than after it's release. But the OS also had a much more sizeable marketshare[1] and the inverse was true (Windows was devoid of software and tools). At the same time, however, the web was also much smaller and certainly still in it's nascent infancy. 1 - https://arstechnica.com/features/2005/12/total-share/7/ https://arstechnica.com/features/2005/12/total-share/7/